Using rakes – a case study This example shows how the data in the database of accidents has shown me something that was not obvious to me. When I first heard that rakes <Click> were being used to excavate mines, I thought it was crazy. <Click> The picture shows a deminer using a rake in Sri Lanka.

Case study in Jordan 1 Case study in Jordan 1 Over a two year period from 2009 to 2011, tens of thousands of mines were removed from a border minefield between Syria and Jordan and all accidental detonations were recorded, including those that caused no significant injury. The picture shows part of the minefield where, as is often the case, some mines were visible. <Click> This is an M19 anti-tank mine and <Click> an M14 anti-personnel mine. Metal-detectors were used to find the mines and the metal-detector signals were excavated using rakes. 34 anti-personnel mine detonations occurred during excavation of a metal-detector signal.

Case study in Jordan 2 Because of the accident reports, we know the equipment and the procedures being used in each accident involving rakes. The pictures show a rake after a detonation and two of the <Click> accident sites.

Case study in Jordan 3 Case study in Jordan 3 Unusually, most of the accidents resulted in no injury at all – the picture shows a happy deminer after an accident. Others resulted in light injury that only required first-aid treatment without hospital care. Only one injury resulted in an eye injury that needed hospital attention. This happened because the deminer was not wearing his eye protection. When protective equipment was used there were no severe injuries at all in these accidents.

Case study in Jordan 4 Case study in Jordan 4 For comparison, the pi-chart shows the injuries in all other excavation accidents around the world recorded in the database of demining accidents over the same two year period. Most excavation injuries were severe and some were fatal.

Case study in Jordan 5 Case study in Jordan 5 Using the rakes for metal detector signal excavation in Jordan, the pi-chart looks very different. From this we can infer that using rakes for metal detector signal excavation is less likely to result in serious injury than other methods.

Case study in Jordan 6 Case study in Jordan 6 This pi-chart shows the injuries in all recorded rake accidents around the world (not only in Jordan) and gives us enough evidence to say that rake excavation is not as likely to cause severe injury as other methods. We cannot know whether using rakes was more likely to initiate a mine than other signal excavation methods because no other method was used in that minefield. If we had more data, we might be able to say more. [The rake method is known to have used in Sri Lanka, Sudan and Yemen and was first used in Kosovo. In fact, a variation has been used for many years by the armies of India and Pakistan.]

Risks using rakes Risks using rakes Statistics can be misleading of course. The use of rakes may introduce new risks. Rakes should never be used where <Click> tilt-sensitive fuzes or tripwires are found. Can you see the Valmara 69 mine here? <Click> And rakes should not be used where there may be anti-lift devices or other movement sensitive fuze systems. Like every tool, they are not suitable to use everywhere.

This is one of the reasons that field risk assessment should be conducted before work starts and then repeated while work is continuing. New hazards or hazards in an unexpected condition may be found and it may be necessary to change the procedures being used. The pictures show mines found in an unanticipated condition which may make them much more sensitive to accidental initiation.

This picture shows mines that have been laid on their side, and this is a situation when I would rather use a rake than any other tool to excavate a metal detector signal. Of course, if the mine can be seen, I would use a hand-tool to gently expose it.

All risk management is a cycle that should involve continuous re-assessment. Rakes can be the safest tool there is for excavating a mine, but could also be very dangerous in the wrong context or when used inappropriately. The same is true for any tool. It is not the tool, it is the way it is used that is either safe or dangerous.